Ultrasound as visual feedback in speech habilitation: Exploring consultative use in rural British Columbia, Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ultrasound has shown promise as a visual feedback tool in speech therapy. Rural clients, however, often have minimal access to new technologies. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate consultative treatment using ultrasound in rural communities. Two speech-language pathologists (SLPs) trained in ultrasound use provided consultation with ultrasound in rural British Columbia to 13 school-aged children with residual speech impairments. Local SLPs provided treatment without ultrasound before and after the consultation. Speech samples were transcribed phonetically by independent trained listeners. Eleven children showed greater gains in production of the principal target /[image omitted]/ after the ultrasound consultation. Four of the seven participants who received more consultation time with ultrasound showed greatest improvement. Individual client factors also affected outcomes. The current study was a quasi-experimental clinic-based study. Larger, controlled experimental studies are needed to provide ultimate evaluation of the consultative use of ultrasound in speech therapy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it